Written Answers Friday 7 May 2010

Scottish Executive

Housing

Mary Mulligan (Linlithgow) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how much has been spent in advertising the Landlord Registration Scheme in each year since the Antisocial Behaviour (Scotland) Act 2004 was introduced, and what forms of advertising have been used.

Alex Neil: A total of £5.2 million of grant funding was provided to local authorities between February 2006 and March 2008 to support start-up costs associated with the delivery of the Landlord Registration Scheme. As a part of this overall support package, templates for information leaflets aimed at tenants and landlords were also provided to local authorities.

  Information on advertising costs incurred in each year is not held centrally, as each local authority has responsibility for promoting and publicising the scheme. We are aware of various forms of advertising employed by local authorities, including newsletters, leaflets, local authority websites, landlord email groups and landlord forums.

Public Sector

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the statement made by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth in the chamber on 25 March 2010 ( Official Report c. 25132) that "We have reviewed a number of the contracts that are in front of us, and some bonus arrangements have been changed", which contracts it has reviewed.

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the statement made by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth in the chamber on 25 March 2010 ( Official Report c. 25132) that "We have reviewed a number of the contracts that are in front of us, and some bonus arrangements have been changed", when these contracts were reviewed.

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the statement made by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth in the chamber on 25 March 2010 ( Official Report c. 25132) that "We have reviewed a number of the contracts that are in front of us, and some bonus arrangements have been changed", which bonus arrangements have been changed as a result of these reviews and what these changes comprise.

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the statement made by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth in the chamber on 25 March 2010 ( Official Report c. 25132) that "We have reviewed a number of the contracts that are in front of us, and some bonus arrangements have been changed", for what reason it did not review the contracts of all senior appointments.

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the statement made by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth in the chamber on 25 March 2010 ( Official Report c. 25132) that "We have reviewed a number of the contracts that are in front of us, and some bonus arrangements have been changed", for what reason it reviewed the contracts that it did.

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the statement made by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth in the chamber on 25 March 2010 ( Official Report c. 25132) that "We have reviewed a number of the contracts that are in front of us, and some bonus arrangements have been changed", for what reason these changes were not considered a breach of contract or in contravention of employment law.

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the statement made by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth in the chamber on 25 March 2010 ( Official Report c. 25132) that "We have reviewed a number of the contracts that are in front of us, and some bonus arrangements have been changed", what form these reviews took.

John Swinney: Chief executives are employees of public bodies and the contractual relationship is between the chief executive and the public body that employs them.

  There are a number of circumstances where a public body might wish to review their chief executive’s remuneration package, for example:

  when a new chief executive post is created or when an existing post becomes vacant;

  when the role and/or responsibilities of the chief executive post is changing;

  when the remuneration of the chief executive post is assessed against market comparators, or

  when there is a proposal to transfer the chief executive post from a spot rate of pay to a pay range.

  Reviews are initiated by the public body as the employer as and when required. The process for carrying out a review and what factors must be considered is set out in the Scottish Government’s Public Sector Pay Policy for Senior Appointments available on the Scottish Government’s website. Within the parameters of the policy, public bodies have the flexibility to determine the pay and rewards for senior appointments that are right for their business needs.

  The Scottish Government’s role is to ensure any proposed changes are within pay policy and to consider for approval remuneration proposals that are submitted to it. The employment contract between the chief executive and the public body may then require amendment to reflect any agreed change.

  A change to a contract is not a breach of contract if the chief executive agrees to the change. Unilaterally to re-open existing employment contracts would breach employment law. Public bodies are expected to comply with employment law.

  Since this administration took office, the Scottish Government has approved reviews for the following chief executive posts:

  Architecture and Design Scotland

  Creative Scotland

  Highlands and Islands Enterprise

  Learning and Teaching Scotland

  Loch Lomond and The Trossachs NPA

  National Library for Scotland

  Scottish Arts Council

  Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration

  Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission

  Scottish Enterprise

  Scottish Funding Councils

  Scottish Futures Trust

  Scottish Legal Aid Board

  Scottish Legal Complaints Commission

  Scottish Police Services Authority

  Scottish Water

  Skills Development Scotland

  Standards Commission

  Water Industry Commission.

  It would not be appropriate to disclose details of individuals’ remuneration but every opportunity is taken to minimise the payment of non-consolidated performance payments. On occasion, the bonus was reduced from what was in place historically and none was proposed for the new bodies of Creative Scotland and the Scottish Futures Trust.

Public Sector

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive whether its public sector pay policy for senior appointments allows it to stipulate that no bonuses should be paid.

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive for what reason it is able to stipulate under its public sector pay policy a limitation on bonuses but not that bonuses should not be paid.

John Swinney: The Scottish Government’s Pay Policy for Senior Appointments allows for non-consolidated performance payments for exceptional performance, though not all chief executives’ contracts include provision for this. Where they do, any proposal to make such a payment requires Scottish Government approval and this Government enforces rigorously the linkage of such payments to a clear demonstration of exceptional performance.

  Unilaterally to re-open existing employment contracts would breach employment law. Public bodies are expected to comply with employment law. Therefore, where a contract includes provision for a chief executive to be considered for a non-consolidated performance payment, the pay policy cannot prohibit such consideration.

  When new remuneration proposals which include the introduction of a non-consolidated performance payment are submitted to the Scottish Government for approval, a robust business case must be made setting out why such a provision is considered a necessary element of the remuneration package. The pay policy limits the maximum potential non-consolidated performance payment allowable.

Public Sector

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive, with reference to the statement made by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth in the chamber on 25 March 2010 that amendment 78 to the Public Services Reform (Scotland) Bill would "single out NDPB chief executives…That is discrimination" ( Official Report c. 25131), for what reason its public sector pay policy for senior appointments is not similarly discriminatory, given that it applies only to senior appointments.

John Swinney: Many public bodies make non-consolidated (bonus) payments for staff below the level of chief executive as part of linking remuneration to performance. My reference to "discrimination" during the Stage 3 debate on the Public Services Reform Bill was in relation to the effect of the amendments in obliging employers to withdraw non-consolidated performance payments for a small group of chief executives (36 staff in total) when significant numbers of staff in public bodies would continue to be considered for such payments. Scottish Government pay policies for senior appointments and staff pay remits govern the pay arrangements for relevant staff groups and care is taken to ensure that they are not in themselves discriminatory.

Public Sector

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it stipulated in the terms and conditions of the contract for the chief executive of Creative Scotland that no bonuses would be payable.

John Swinney: Remuneration proposals for the Creative Scotland chief executive post did not include provision for a bonus.

Public Sector

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it stipulated in the terms and conditions for the contracts of the chief executives of Scottish Enterprise and Scottish Water, when these were renegotiated, that no bonuses would be payable.

John Swinney: Remuneration proposals for the Scottish Enterprise chief executive post included a reduction in the maximum potential bonus arrangement, from the 12.5% agreed by the previous administration to a level within the current pay policy limits.

  The remuneration arrangements for Scottish Water chief executive reflect its unique position in the public sector in Scotland. These arrangements, including a potential annual bonus of up to 40%, were agreed by the previous administration in 2006 and were continued for the current chief executive who was appointed in March 2008 on similar terms and conditions to his predecessor. The arrangements reflect the need to retain and motivate high calibre personnel and to ensure that the organisation can compete directly for talent with the privatised water companies elsewhere in the UK against which its performance is benchmarked.

Scottish Futures Trust

Ms Wendy Alexander (Paisley North) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the Scottish Futures Trust has developed an alternative model of procurement to PPP/PFI.

John Swinney: I have asked Barry White, Chief Executive of the Scottish Futures Trust to respond. His response is as follows:

  The Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) is seeking to improve value for money across infrastructure investment and is implementing a variety of means to achieve this. No single funding and financing model will be able to meet the new challenges that we face in delivering public infrastructure in changed economic times.

  Over the past year, SFT has:

  advanced the Non Profit Distributing (NPD) model of finance to improve value for money on projects such as Borders Railway and the Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route;

  brought into procurement a joint venture model in the hub programme;

  devised a highly innovative partnership financing model for the National Housing Trust to deliver £130 million of additional housing in its initial phase, and

  driven forward the introduction of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) to finance unlocking infrastructure for economically important regeneration projects.

Scottish Futures Trust

Ms Wendy Alexander (Paisley North) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what projects are supported by the Scottish Futures Trust and what the procurement model is for each.

John Swinney: I have asked Barry White, Chief Executive of the Scottish Futures Trust to respond. His response is as follows:

  The following table lists the projects being supported by the Scottish Futures Trust in 2010-11 as identified in their Business Plan, and, where appropriate, gives the procurement model being used.

  

Project/Programme
Procurement Method


hub Partnership 
To \be determined on a project by project basis


Schools programme development 
Capital


Scotland waste management
To be determined on a project by project basis


National Housing Trust
New financing model


TIF (Tax Incremental Financing)
New financing model


Spending landscape/IFRS
-


Borders Rail
Non Profit Distributing 


Forth Replacement Crossing
Capital


Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route
Non Profit Distributing 


Renewables infrastructure
To be determined on a project by project basis


Social Housing Collaborative Procurement
-


Tayside Mental Health
Non Profit Distributing 


Moray Schools
Non Profit Distributing 


Western Isles Schools
Special Purpose Vehicle


Orkney Schools
Special Purpose Vehicle

Scottish Futures Trust

Bill Butler (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-31391 by John Swinney on 25 February 2010, whether it will provide details of any further expenditure by the Scottish Futures Trust on consultancy fees between 26 February and 31 March 2010.

John Swinney: I have asked Barry White, Chief Executive of the Scottish Futures Trust to respond. His response is as follows:

  SFT has engaged external assistance where necessary to help deliver and support the £5.5 billion of projects set out in our 2009-10 Business Plan and to meet the commitment outlined in our Corporate Plan of delivering at least £7 of benefits for every £1 spent on the organisation.

  SFT’s expenditure on specialist support in the time specified falls under two headings: hub programme and recruitment.

  Consultancy spend in relation to the hub programme

  Further to the answer to question S3W-31391, SFT has made additional payments to the financial, legal and technical advisors to the hub programme during March 2010 taking the totals for the Financial Year 2009-10 to £143,365 to PricewaterhouseCoopers, £167,969 to Pinsent Masons and £62,899 to Mott Macdonald respectively net of VAT. The costs for this specialist support represents around 0.04% of the £1 billion of construction activity that will be delivered through the programme. The expert services secured have enabled SFT to create a set of core documents, processes and procedures which can be repeatedly adopted by public bodies across Scotland, continually adding value over the 20 year lifetime of hub contracts.

  Consultancy spend in relation to recruitment:

  External support offers a value for money approach to enable SFT to recruit six support staff. For this support SFT has paid £8,000 (net of VAT) to Search Consultancy between 26 February and 31 March 2010.